论文标题

比较210pb年代数据分析的仿真研究

A simulation study to compare 210Pb dating data analyses

论文作者

Aquino-López, Marco A, Sanderson, Nicole K., Blaauw, Maarten, Sanchez-Cabeza, Joan-Albert, Ruiz-Fernandez, Ana Carolina, Aquino-López, J Andrés Christen Marco A, Sanderson, Nicole K., Blaauw, Maarten, Sanchez-Cabeza, Joan-Albert, Ruiz-Fernandez, Ana Carolina, Christen, J Andrés

论文摘要

对了解人为影响对环境的影响的兴趣日益增加,导致了大量的研究,重点是最后$ \ sim $ 100-200年的沉积记录。与放射性碳(14C)年龄相关的分辨率差,这是最受欢迎的约会技术,这一时期的约会通常使其复杂化。为了提高最近时期的年龄深度模型分辨率,使用Lead-210($^{210} $ PB)的沉积物约会,因为它提供了最后$ \ sim $ 100-150年的绝对和连续日期。 $^{210} $ pb约会方法传统上依赖恒定的供应速率(CRS,也称为恒定通量-CF)模型,该模型使用放射性衰减方程作为年龄深度关系,导致限制性模型以近似日期。在这项工作中,我们将经典方法与$^{210} $ PB约会(CRS)及其贝叶斯替代方案(\ textit {plum})进行比较。为此,我们在三个不同的沉积过程之后创建了模拟的$^{210} $ pb概况,符合CRS模型施加的假设,并使用这两种方法对其进行了分析。结果表明,即使使用高约约会分辨率分辨率,CRS模型也不会捕获真实值,并且随着更多信息可用,其准确性也可以提高其准确性。另一方面,贝叶斯替代方案(\ textit {plum})即使有很少的样本,也提供了更准确的结果,并且随着更多信息提供,其准确性和精度会不断提高。

The increasing interest in understanding anthropogenic impacts on the environment have led to a considerable number of studies focusing on sedimentary records for the last $\sim$ 100 - 200 years. Dating this period is often complicated by the poor resolution and large errors associated with radiocarbon (14C) ages, which is the most popular dating technique. To improve age-depth model resolution for the recent period, sediment dating with lead-210 ($^{210}$Pb) is widely used as it provides absolute and continuous dates for the last $\sim$ 100 - 150 years. The $^{210}$Pb dating method has traditionally relied on the Constant Rate of Supply (CRS, also known as Constant Flux - CF) model which uses the radioactive decay equation as an age-depth relationship resulting in a restrictive model to approximate dates. In this work, we compare the classical approach to $^{210}$Pb dating (CRS) and its Bayesian alternative (\textit{Plum}). To do so, we created simulated $^{210}$Pb profiles following three different sedimentation processes, complying with the assumptions imposed by the CRS model, and analysed them using both approaches. Results indicate that the CRS model does not capture the true values even with a high dating resolution for the sediment, nor improves does its accuracy improve as more information is available. On the other hand, the Bayesian alternative (\textit{Plum}) provides consistently more accurate results even with few samples, and its accuracy and precision constantly improves as more information is available.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源